Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Hunter Biden argues his conviction should be tossed, citing judge's ruling in Trump documents case
NBC 'News' via MSN ^ | 7/18/24 | Tom Winter, Sarah Fitzpatrick, Dareh Gregorian

Posted on 07/18/2024 6:09:41 PM PDT by Libloather

Hunter Biden is using a pair of judicial opinions that were favorable to his father's political rival to argue his conviction on gun charges should be tossed out.

In federal court papers filed in Delaware, Hunter Biden’s attorneys asked the judge who oversaw his gun trial to dismiss the case against him because of a federal court ruling in Florida dismissing the classified documents case against former President Donald Trump.

In the ruling Monday, U.S. District Judge Aileen Cannon dismissed Jack Smith’s criminal case against Trump on the grounds that the appointment of and funding for the special counsel were illegal.

President Joe Biden’s son contends that that ruling, plus a concurrence by Justice Clarence Thomas in the Supreme Court’s presidential immunity decision in the federal election interference case against Trump earlier this month, are reasons to dismiss special counsel David Weiss’ case against him.

“Based on these new legal developments, Mr. Biden moves to dismiss the indictment brought against him because the Special Counsel who initiated this prosecution was appointed in violation of the Appointments Clause as well,” the filing says.

“The Attorney General relied upon the exact same authority to appoint the Special Counsel in both the Trump and Biden matters, and both appointments are invalid for the same reason,” the filing argues.

(Excerpt) Read more at msn.com ...


TOPICS: Business/Economy; Conspiracy; Health/Medicine; History
KEYWORDS: bidencrimefamily; conviction; documents; hunter; hunterbiden; judge; trump
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-29 last
To: JackTom

I don’t see there that they differ. Thomas is saying that there is no apparent basis to derive prosecutorial powers for Smith, being that he doesn’t hold a legally established position, on top of not having been confirmed to a position with its own prosecutorial authority. At this time, Special Counsel is a extra-legal label rather than a position.


21 posted on 07/18/2024 10:04:33 PM PDT by lepton ("It is useless to attempt to reason a man out of a thing he was never reasoned into"--Jonathan Swift)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: nagant

Are you talking about the Presidential immunity ruling, or the hearing as to whether Smith can bring cases at all? They touch each other, but are distinct.

This is about Judge Cannon’s ruling on whether Smith is actually a Prosecutor, and references Thomas’ comments on the same idea. You seem to be referring to the Presidential Immunity aspects of the appeals.


22 posted on 07/18/2024 10:09:32 PM PDT by lepton ("It is useless to attempt to reason a man out of a thing he was never reasoned into"--Jonathan Swift)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: lepton

Fair observation.

The US legal system has now four classes of argumentation?

Argue the Politics

Argue the Facts

Argue the Law

Pound the Table

[And (as a sixth) I would propose: Argue the emotions]


23 posted on 07/18/2024 11:03:35 PM PDT by Paladin2 (YMMV)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: lepton

MORE than a “fair” Observation....

The “Law” these days is WAY less than deterministic.

Traitor Roberts is totally wrong on his pronouncement that there are NO political Judges.

[“We do not have Obama judges or Trump judges, Bush judges or Clinton judges.”]

Traitor Roberts is apparently an idiot. He’s definitely a part of the problem.


24 posted on 07/18/2024 11:10:43 PM PDT by Paladin2 (YMMV)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: Paladin2

Fifth.

[I only have so many fingers....]


25 posted on 07/18/2024 11:17:09 PM PDT by Paladin2 (YMMV)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: Gahanna Bob

Hmmm, in that case seems like the motion is for show to the low info crowd and the lawyers filing must know its not valid. Very dishonest of them.


26 posted on 07/19/2024 2:22:04 AM PDT by AndyTheBear (Certified smarter than average for my species)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Libloather

Daddy better pardon him quickly.


27 posted on 07/19/2024 6:17:15 AM PDT by bgill
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Libloather

And what does a gun case have to do with a ruling about a special prosecutor??


28 posted on 07/19/2024 12:25:32 PM PDT by mfish13 (Elections have Consequences.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Libloather

And what does a gun case have to do with a ruling about a special prosecutor??


29 posted on 07/19/2024 12:25:32 PM PDT by mfish13 (Elections have Consequences.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-29 last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson